[Fwd: [evol-psych] That Old Magic - Evolutionary Psychology, Part
- From: "Phil Roberts, Jr." <philrob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 14:31:02 -0400 (EDT)
[Josh. I removed the reply to Ian Pitchford of the first post
on this subject. Use this one instead]
June 01, 2005
That Old Magic - Evolutionary Psychology, Part I
Bonnie Alba
Your answers to the following questions will show, partly at
least, what you believe and how you think about yourself and the
world around you.
Door #1: Am I a material, physical body with an advanced animal
brain? I respond to myself and the world around me solely from
preprogrammed evolutionary-genetic makeup and environmental
factors which influence how I react and behave in certain ways?
My thinking life is part of the brain matter; and when I die,
that?s the end?
Door #2: Am I an immaterial mind-soul who lives in a physical
brain-body? I have a unique self-conscious awareness? I think,
imagine and doubt, my private thought pattern-life is unknown to
anyone else unless I communicate it outwardly? My mind-soul will
survive death?
Depending on your basic worldview in accordance with your
answers, if you see yourself in number one, then you will
disagree with this article. If number 2, you mostly likely will
see the merits of it.
The old study of the mind and mental-emotional processes of man
has now transitioned into what first was called Sociobiology (E.
G. Wilson) to the modern term Evolutionary Psychology. Proposing
to connect the dots between man?s natural selection, adaptation,
and behavioral history, psychologists are postulating ever
extravagant theories of behavior. Based on what? Not one single
shred of genetic, chemical or other biological evidence has been
shown to prove or disprove the existence of self-aware
consciousness.
Today?s scientists see no boundaries in proposing their singular
unethical theories. An extreme example is Princeton University
professor Peter Singer who publicly advocated sexual relations
between humans and animals, otherwise called bestiality. By his
own admission, he is attacking the ?Judeo-Christian tradition?
that teaches that ?humans alone are made in the image of God.?
He maintained that evolution has thoroughly refuted the biblical
account and that ?We are animals.? Therefore ?sex across the
species barrier ceases to be an offense to our status and
dignity as human beings.?
Another: Cornell biologist William Provine tells university
students that the Darwinian revolution still has another
frontier to conquer, all its moral and religious implications.
He says, ?There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no
ultimate meaning in life, and no free will.? I wonder how he is
able to function in the real world?
You see, the theory of evolution that some scientists hold as
their mantra cannot explain in any shape or form the
consciousness we all individually have. Atheist professor Colin
McGinn noted: ?How can mere matter originate consciousness? How
did evolution convert the water of biological tissue into the
wine of consciousness? Consciousness seems like a radical
novelty in the universe, not prefigured by the aftereffects of
the Big Bang. So how did it contrive to spring into being from
what preceded it??
Even he made a mistake in his wondering. ?...how did ?it
contrive?...?? As if somehow ?it? preceded ?itself? in order to
arise at all. This in itself requires something intelligent in
the preceding of ?it?.
British evolutionist J.B.S. Haldane acknowledged that, ?If my
mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of the
atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs
are true...and hence I have no reason for supposing my brain
[mind] to be composed of atoms.?
As Nancy Pearcey pointed out, there is a logical flaw in the
theory of evolutionary psychology. ?For if all our ideas are
products of evolution, then so is the idea of evolutionary
psychology itself. Like all other constructs of the human mind,
it is not true but only useful for survival.?
Therefore, Darwin?s theory is also a produced-in-the-brain idea
which threatens to overtake all of humankind to
dissatisfactorily explain all things. Mechanical and physical
evolutionism cannot explain man?s self-awareness, that conscious
part of us which thinks outside the physical realm.
This is the giant question left open: Are we just matter, dust,
water and chemicals; materialistic mammals with well-developed
animal brains? Or are we also endowed with an extra something,
the mind-soul? Those who hold only to physicalism must still
live in the real world of their own self-aware consciousness.
Who has not experienced the knowledge of free will, ability to
know and choose right and wrong, good and evil, morality and
immorality, life and death. This is not an evolving mechanism
and remains outside of the construct of material science.
So who are you? When someone says ?Nature is all there is, was,
or ever will be? what is your response? Door number one or two?
My question is ?How is number one beneficial for the progress of
mankind?? That is, ?with or without man seeking to interfere
with natural evolution??
[stay tuned]
© 2005 Bonnie Alba
balba2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sources:
?Total Truth,? Nancey Pearcey
?How Now Shall We Live?? Charles Colson, Nancy Pearcy
?Discovery Institute,? www.discovery.org/crsc
http://www.opinioneditorials.com/freedomwriters/balba_20050601.html
=========
Ian Pitchford PhD CBiol MIBiol
http://human-nature.com/ep/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evolutionary-psychology/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
evolutionary-psychology-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--
Phil Roberts, Jr.
Why We Turned Out Like Captain Kirk Instead of Mr. Spock:
The Psychodynamics of Genetic Indeterminism
http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/dada/90/Kirk.htm
.
- Prev by Date: Re: What Part of life are you NOT connected to?
- Next by Date: Re: History of genetic elements?
- Previous by thread: Re: [evol-psych] That Old Magic - Evolutionary Psychology, Part I
- Next by thread: Re: specialization momentum
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
